I’ve always mistrusted the flu shot. People willing to line up by the millions to have some chemical injected into their blood stream. What if it’s not a flu shot? What if it’s some sort of brain-altering chemical substance that turns you into a drooling zombie?
That also explains my theory on where liberals come from.
Michelle Malkin has been tracking studies on flu shots, and a recent study says that any benefit is substantially overestimated:
We could not correlate increasing vaccination coverage after 1980 with declining mortality rates in any age group. Because fewer than 10% of all winter deaths were attributable to influenza in any season, we conclude that observational studies substantially overestimate vaccination benefit.
In fact, an Los Angeles Times story reports that the flu shot may not be effective at reducing flu shot deaths at all:
Although previous studies have suggested that flu shots reduce mortality among the elderly by 50% to 80%, a new study of three decades of mortality data indicates that widespread use of the vaccine has not been nearly that effective, and may not have reduced deaths among the elderly at all.
The study uncovered a bias that made it appear the flu shot was effective: very ill, elderly patients did not receive the vaccine; patients were required to somewhat healthy first. When the healthy vaccinated patients lived and the unhealthy unvaccinated patients died, previous studies concluded that it was the flu shot that helped the patients live. Studies now are showing that there may not be any positive effect at all. In fact, even though vaccination rates increased from 20% in 1980 to over 65% of the population by 2001, deaths due to flu were statistically flat, unaffected by the flu shot at all.
It’s a mind-control vaccine that makes you want to tax and spend. Now I’m sure of it. Resist it.
Chasing the Wind 
Leave a reply to Michelle Malkin » HOW EFFECTIVE ARE FLU SHOTS? Cancel reply